Dumbledore's successor

[melclaros]

No: HPFGUIDX 59049

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "paulanurse2003" 
<paula.russell at l...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Linda" <linlou43 at y...> wrote:
> >  Tyler wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > There's reasons to believe that Snape WOULD be made
> > > > headmaster if DD died. > 
> > > 
> >  
> >  Mel added:
> > 
> > > It's not that far of a reach at all really. Snape (like it or 
> not) 
> > > has a history of taking control in a variety of situations. 
He's 
> > > certainly more pro-active than McG. and she's supposed to be 
the 
> > 2nd. 
> 
> 
> Paula (myself) adds:
> 
> Surely not Snape. If this was the case, in CoS when DD was actually 
> removed by apparently (then) democratic means, Snape would have 
made 
> his move? McGonagall automatically became deputy head. However, I 
> suppose DD was still actually alive. Perhaps SS would be more 
> aggressive about assuming control of Hogwarts if DD were dead.



Mel:
Goodness! It wouldn't be a coup! "Make his move"? McGonnogal IS 
deputy Head and she took over in CoS with the distinct impression 
that the situation was temporary (from how I understood it). That, 
however was a very, very different situation to actually having 
Dumbledore DEAD and absolutely not coming back. In that case the 
succession, I believe, would be decided by the governors. It is 
certainly possible that they'd just slide her in as Headmistress, 
they do seem rather--wanting of spine. But we're talking about tricky 
times here, Having someone like Snape in charge would have its 
advantages. We don't know how the governors would act, really. 
I just see Snape as pro-active while MgG is re-active. What would the 
governors be looking for? Dunno.

Mel